Re: Predicted lifespan of different PostgreSQL branches

Tom Lane wrote:
> Dave Page <dpage(at)postgresql(dot)org> writes:
>> I've been considering only maintaining the current and previous 2
>> versions in pgInstaller (the Windows binary distro). But that's a *lot*
>> harder to maintain than just PostgreSQL because of all the bundled
>> stuff. In other words, when 8.3 is out, the 8.0 series gets dropped.
>> What do people think about that? Does anyone think it would be an
>> unreasonable policy?
>
> Actually, I was just wondering last night about whether we should bother
> maintaining the 8.0/8.1 Windows ports at all. Everybody knew going in
> (or should have known) that 8.0 on Windows would be a pretty raw port
> with a lot of issues, as indeed it was, and so long-term support for it
> seems a bit pointless. Perhaps the 8.1 port was up to the point where
> it would be sane to use for production, or maybe not.
>
> I haven't tracked Windows-specific issues particularly, but I think
> there were at least some important patches we didn't back-port because
> of complexity. Certainly 8.0 and 8.1 src/backend/port/win32/ files look
> quite a bit different. Does anyone recall any specifics about Windows
> patches that were back-ported or not?
>
> Anyway I think that a fair case could be made for dropping the 8.0
> branch now, and maybe 8.1 too, as far as Windows support goes. What
> you want to do going forward is a different decision --- these are
> edge cases because of the newness of the port.

Based on that it would be reasonable to cut 8.0 short, I agree on that.
However, I really don't think we can do that to 8.1. For one, 8.2 is
*way* too new yet. I also do believe we got most of the really big ones
between those (though I can't remember them specifically right now, it's
a feeling I have). But the important part is that either way I think
it's way too early to drop 8.1.

//Magnus